Beginnings to ICAOs Standards Curt Graeber, Ph.D. FRMS Task Force - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

International Civil Aviation Organization

The FRMS Journey: From Its Beginnings to ICAO’s Standards

Curt Graeber, Ph.D. FRMS Task Force Leader

30 August 2011

Today’s FRMS Topics

• The Beginnings
• Why Introduce FRMS?
• ICAO’s Approach
• What It Is, and What It Isn’t

3

NASA Ames & Pan Am

Bombay, 1982

CAUSE OF FATIGUE HAZARD DOMESTIC SHORT HAUL DOMESTIC NIGHT CARGO LONG HAUL

Restricted sleep due to short rest breaks

X

Restricted sleep due to early duty report times

X

Multiple high workload periods across the duty day

X

Multiple sectors

X X

High density airspace

X

Long duty days

X X

Extended wakefulness on duty days

X

High workload during circadian low

X XX

Shorter sleep periods at wrong phase in the circadian cycle

X X

Circadian disruption (due to night work)

X X

Split sleep patterns and short sleep episodes

• n layovers

X X

Circadian disruption (due to crossing multiple time zones)

X

Circadian drift (changes in circadian cycle) following extended trip patterns

X

Gander PH, Rosekind MR, Gregory KB (1998). Aviat, Space Environ Med 69 (9): B49-B60.

NASA In-Flight Crew Fatigue Studies 1981-89

5

The International Team Approach

Industry, Regulators, Labor, & Science (1985)

RAF IAM Farnborough Stanford Univ. DFVLR Jikei Univ. NASA Ames British Airways Lufthansa Pan Am Japan Airlines BALPA ALPA Vereinigung Cockpit UK CAA USN Hlth Rsch Ctr

International Layover Sleep Study

International Layover Sleep Study

Nocturnal Sleep Depends on Flight Direction

8

So What Came of it?

• 1993: Air New Zealand seeks an innovative, data

driven approach for crew scheduling.

• Teams with NASA, NZ and UK scientists to develop.
• Forms an internal multi-disciplinary team to

implement.

• Establishes external oversight panel.

OVERSIGHT AND REVIEW IAAP Independent Alertness Advisory Panel

• Dr. C. Graeber, Chair
• Prof. S. Folkard
• Prof. P. Cabon
• Dr. L. Signal

DECISIONS Management Pilots Cabin Crew CAANZ, Gen’l Mgr – Airlines Rule Part 121K Alternative Means of Compliance DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS AND ADVICE CASG Crew Alertness Study Group Medical, Chair Pilot Management Cabin Crew Mgmt Crew Reps Rostering Local Scientists TOOLS Psychomotor Vigilance Task Subjective Ratings Air NZ Alertness Test Surveys QinetiQ SAFE Model

AIR NEW ZEALAND’S FATIGUE RISK MANAGEMENT SCHEME

DATA

• 1. Crew Fatigue Reports
• 2. Operational Scientifically Based Studies
• 3. Fleet-Wide “Top of Descent” Fatigue Snapshot
• 4. SAFE Model Outputs

Managing Fatigue Risk in ULR

Ultra Long-Range: An operation involving any sector between a specific city pair (A-B-A) in which the planned flight time exceeds 16 hrs.

• Get ahead of the challenge
• Leverage industry and scientific knowledge
• FSF can facilitate a comprehensive global approach
• No formal tie to regulatory authorities
• Steering Committee of key stakeholders

Ultra-Long Range Crew Alertness Steering Committee

Airlines

Air New Zealand Singapore Airlines (AAPA) British Airways (AEA) Delta Airlines (ATA)

Regulatory Authorities

JAA (UK CAA) Ex-CASA * co-chairs

Flight Safety Foundation* Professional Associations

IFALPA

Science - Medical

QinetiQ Sleep-Wake Research Centre

Manufacturers

Boeing* Airbus

ULR Crew Alertness Workshops

• Determine common approaches
• Develop technical basis for operational and

regulatory guidance

• Seek global multi-stakeholder consensus
• 90 participants from 14 countries

Washington, DC (Boeing): June 12-14, 2001 Paris, France (Airbus): March 4-7, 2002 Kuala Lumpur (AAPA): March 12-14, 2003 Los Angeles (SQ follow-up): May 24-26, 2005

Enabling ULR Operations

In-Flight Data

+

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Time since sleep (h) Alertness 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Time of day (h) Alertness

Lab Data

Math Modeling

Prediction

Schedules

PVT/Log Flight Data Monitoring

Monitoring

+ +

Validate/ Adjust Schedules

Actigraphy

Task Force/ Steering Committee

(Operator, Regulator,

Pilot Group)

Independent Scientific Organization Select Validation Plan Data Collection Analysis Recommendations Goals & Protocol Ongoing monitoring/ evaluation

Consensus Recommendations:

Validation Process for Operational Model

SME Operational Model A m e n d

Today’s FRMS Topics

• The Beginnings
• Why Introduce FRMS?
• ICAO’s Approach
• What It Is, and What It Isn’t

17

How do we currently manage fatigue?

• Prescriptive flight and duty time limitations

– Revised 2009 – Parameters based on scientific principles – Specifics identified by regulator – One-size fits all – Arbitrary “safety” line

• Covered in 4 chapters, not integrated

ICAO Annex 6 Part I

Flight & Cabin Crew

Do Flight Duty Limitations (FDLs) Work?

• Fatigue related accidents and incidents continue.
• Unable to address key alertness factors.
• Limits identified by industrial agreements.
• Unsuccessful attempts to set new limits.
• Exemptions are extremely common.
• No worldwide standards to enable fair competition.
• Over 25 years of scientific results awaiting application.

What is FRMS?

• Addresses fatigue irrespective of the cause.
• Based upon scientific principles and knowledge as

well as operational experience.

• Requires a systematic, organizational approach.
• Includes flight and cabin crew.
• Requires shared responsibility among management

and crews. A data driven means of continuously monitoring and managing fatigue-related safety risks that aims to ensure crew members are performing at adequate levels of alertness.

Why move to FRMS?

• Prescribed limitations provide only “one slice
• f cheese”.
• FRMS provides more defence

barriers.

– Addresses alertness variables not addressed by FDLs. – Reflects unique and changing airline factors. – Manages fatigue risk relevant to specific circumstances

• Allows for greater operational flexibility.
• Can result in potential insurance reductions.

Today’s FRMS Topics

• The Beginnings
• Why Introduce FRMS?
• ICAO’s Approach
• What It Is vs. What It Isn’t

How did ICAO develop the FRMS SARPs proposal?

• Previous work by ICAO Ops Panel:

– FTL Subgroup (2003-06) – FRMS Subgroup (2006-08) – FRMS Subgroup proposes introduction of FRMS to Annex 6 in a Working Paper (2008)

• FRMS Task Force (2009-11)

FRMS Task Force – Members and Advisors

States Organisations *Operators Scientists

Australia Canada China France Germany Japan New Zealand Singapore United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States EASA IATA AEA ICCAIA - *Boeing *Airbus IFALPA Delta Airlines Emirates Airlines Etihad Airways Qantas easyJet Air New Zealand DHL Singapore Airlines Lufthansa

• Prof. Philippa Gander (NZ)
• Prof. Philippe Cabon (FR)
• Prof. Greg Belenky (US)

ICAO:

• Dr. Curt Graeber (Leader)
• Dr. Michelle Millar

(Technical Coordinator)

* Advisors to member States or organizations.

What was ICAO trying to achieve?

Provide standards and guidance which:

• Improve the ability to manage fatigue risk
• Apply current scientific knowledge and tools plus

industry best practice

• Are based on joint industry-government consensus
• Identify various operationally viable methods
• Assure appropriate regulatory oversight
• Enhance global harmonization in their use

The Task

• Build upon the Ops Panel’s previous work.
• Specify the implementation of a non-prescriptive

approach.

• For application to:

– Annex 6, Part 1 Operators: International Commercial Air Transport – Aeroplanes – Flight crew and cabin crew

• Provide guidance so that States can oversee, and
• perators can use, FRMS.

26

The Outcome

Combined all fatigue management standards into one section in Chapter 4:

• Prescriptive Flight & Duty

time limitations

• FRMS

Developed detailed FRMS guidance material.

Today’s FRMS Topics

• The Beginnings
• Why Introduce FRMS?
• ICAO’s Approach
• What It Is, and What It Isn’t

Key Concepts

• 1. Crew Fatigue Safeguards
• 2. Operational Flexibility
• 3. Labor agreements
• 4. Impact on Personnel
• 5. Scientific basis
• 6. Data driven
• 7. Vulnerability to manipulation
• 8. Continuous improvement
• 9. Relationship to SMS

10.Regulatory Oversight

Slide 28

Key Concepts

Crew Fatigue Safeguards

• FRMS reduces safety by eliminating flight duty

time limits that assure crews fly rested.

– Must ask crews: “Are you legal?”

Slide 29

• It improves safety by addressing factors that

prescriptive limits don’t address.

─ Must ask crews: “Are you too tired to fly?”

• Enables management of fatigue risk irrespective of

the cause.

• Enables operators to mitigate fatigue risk in a

measureable way.

Key Concepts

Operational Flexibility

• FRMS is primarily designed to increase
• perational flexibility at the expense of fatigued

crews.

• It allows operators to fly whenever they want.

Slide 30

• It improves flexibility by focusing on those specific
• perational factors that cause fatigue and

mitigating their impact on crews.

• Enables operators to improve efficiency without

jeopardizing safety due to fatigue.

Key Concepts

Labor Agreements

• FRMS enables operators to bypass the work hour

provisions of labor agreements designed to protect crew from fatigue.

Slide 31

• It accommodates labor agreements in a manner

that improves crew’s protection from fatigue inducing rosters and schedules.

Key Concepts

Impact on Personnel

• ICAO’s FRMS only affects flight and cabin crew.

Slide 32

• It affects all personnel and managers involved in

rostering, route design, training, safety systems, and crew well being.

• It assures awareness of fatigue risks at all levels of

the organization.

• FRMS approach is broadly applicable to other

safety related personnel.

Key Concepts

Scientific Basis

• It is a new unproven scientific concept which

does not consider operational factors and which requires complicated scientific procedures.

Slide 33

• FRMS was developed from over 30 years of

research and 18 years of successful application at major airlines around the world.

• Integrates scientifically based fatigue risk

assessment into operational planning.

Key Concepts

Data Driven

• FRMS consists of applying biomathematical models of

fatigue to analyze flight schedules and rosters.

• Objective FDM data is sufficient; no subjective data is

required from crew members.

Slide 34

• Biomathematical models can be used to initially assess the

fatigue risk of particular schedules but are not sufficient.

• Model outputs must be validated.
• Both objective and subjective data, including fatigue

reports, are essential for any FRMS.

Key Concepts

Vulnerability to Manipulation

• The FRMS data can be falsely manipulated by

crew members who seek to portray a particular

• peration or duty roster as too fatiguing.
• Operators are at the mercy of “outlier” crew

members.

Slide 35

• Standard statistical techniques can be used to

identify data that originate from artificially manipulated inputs.

• Such data can be legitimately discarded.

Key Concepts

Continuous Improvement

• Once implemented, FRMS goes on autopilot.
• Once a schedule or roster is positively assessed

by FRMS, no further data or analysis is required.

Slide 36

• FRMS is based on a continuous improvement

process.

• While the need for in-depth data analysis may

diminish following an initial positive analysis, continued oversight based on data is required.

Key Concepts

Relationship to SMS

• FRMS is separate from an operator’s other safety

reporting systems.

Slide 37

• FRMS is based on continuous improvement, just

like SMS.

• Depends on an effective safety reporting culture

and active involvement of all stakeholders.

• Requires the routine acquisition and analysis of

safety reports.

• ICAO recommends FRMS be integrated with SMS.

Key Concepts

Regulatory Oversight

• FRMS is too complicated to enable sufficient

regulatory oversight.

Slide 38

• FRMS is based on well defined processes and data

analysis.

• ICAO has developed guidance for regulators for
• verseeing FRMS.
• Regulators will find that oversight of FRMS is

similar to that of SMS.

Conclusion

• FRMS offers a better way to manage fatigue risk

than only operating within duty hour limits.

• FRMS applies scientific knowledge within a

comprehensive, accountable approach.

• FRMS represents a paradigm shift in managing

fatigue as a safety risk.

• FRMS offers a major opportunity to improve

aviation safety worldwide.

Slide 39

• Dr. Curtis Graeber

President, The Graeber Group, Ltd. 13011 NE 70th Drive, Kirkland, WA 98033 USA Phone: (+1) 425 246 2950 Email: Curt.graeber@gmail.com

Slide 40

Contact Details